SHARE PURCHASE TERMS

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LXIII, Issue 19030, 2 June 1936, Page 7

SHARE PURCHASE TERMS

McArthur group plan COURT RULING SOUGHT (Per Press Association.) AUCKLAND, this day. A dispute over the terms on which a Dunedin agent had been employed by a company associated with the McArthur group to purchase shares in ■certain other companies resulted in an action for the recovery of amounts totalling £lß9l, with interest, being commenced before Mr. Justice Ostler in the Supreme Court yesterday. The plaintiff was the Transport Mutual and General Insurance Company, Limited, in liquidation, and the defendant was Cyril Ernie Richard Webber, agent, of Dunedin. Mr. y. N. Hubble, who appeared for the plaintiff, said- that the Public Trustee was the liquidator of the plaintiff company. The action was really a claim for the balance of moneys received by the defendant for which the plaintiff said he had to account. The plaintiff company w T as one of those associated -with the Investment Executive Trust of New Zealand, Limited, now under the control of the Public Trustee by virtue of two Acts of Parliament.

The defendant admitted receiving moneys. He said, in fact, that he had accounted for them and that there was no 'balance owing by him, but that’there was a balance owing to him. It was hot disputed that the defendant rendered services to the company, but there was a dispute as to the terms of hi.s engagement. It was this that the court was asked to decide. OBVIOUSLY CONTROLLED

Counsel reviewed the formation of the company. “While this company was incorporated in the ordinary way, it was obviously controlled by the Investment Executive Trust of New Zealand, Limited,’’ Hr. Hubble continued. Its only real activity was the acquiring of shares, principally in a Dunedin concern, the Trustees Executors and Agency Company of New Zealand, Limited, and apparently a plan had been devised by a group of companies, known as the McArthur group, to acquire control of the Dunedin company.

It was in connection with that activity that the defendant rendered services to the plaintiff company. Mr. Ilampson, for the defendant, said there had never been any desire on the defendant’s part to avoid giving the fullest account of the money he had received, nor was his honesty questioned. Cyril Ernie Richard Webber, the defendant, said that in January of 1934 he was with Messrs. McArthur and Alcorn and agreed to acquire shares in two companies for a salary of £4OO a year. This was to be raised to £IOOO a year when 10 per cent of the Dunedin shares had been obtained. He had done considerable preparatory work, for which he understood he was to receive £SOO. Subsequently he went to Sydney, where it was agreed to pay him £IOOO a year. The hearing was adjourned.